What Do Most Americans
Know, Think About Climate Change?

Kicking off the morning discussions, Stanford communications professor and researcher Jon A. Krosnick, who has done research for ABC News, Associated Press, CBS, Time, The Washington Post, and other organizations, offered a snapshot of his research findings dating back about a decade.

Krosnick emphasized to the editors that as far back as the fall of 1997, 78 percent of Americans he surveyed said they thought global warming was under way, with only about 20 percent rejecting that viewpoint. He said more than 60 percent of those surveyed in 1997 felt the consequences of warming would be negative, with about 16 percent saying they thought they would be beneficial.

Krosnick told the editors that there was a huge gap in 1997 between what the public thought SHOULD be done to combat global warming and what they thought in fact was being done. They wanted far more action than they saw happening.

"It's remarkable how much agreement there was on these issues, even back then," Krosnick told the editors. Asked by Carolyn Washburn, executive editor of the Des Moines Register, the sources of the information on which they based their opinions, Krosnick replied that he did not know: "People know what they know," he said, "but they don't remember where they got it."

Beneath Surface: Growing Partisanship Divide

At the same time Krosnick was finding what for some was a surprising amount of agreement among the public on climate change, another development was under way: beneath the surface, there was a growing partisan division forming. Where political party members long had been in general agreement on a need to regulate industrial pollution, a partisan divide was taking root. "People began to polarize along party lines," Krosnick said. "Opinions became more based on party loyalties."

More recently, Krosnick said large majorities showing awareness of global warming persist, with polls showing some 86 percent of respondents aware of the issue. (Whatever the issue, public opinion just doesn't get much stronger than that, Krosnick said, and it's unlikely to get any higher. Those most likely to be concerned about the issue – those highly educated, generally more trusting of the scientific community, and believing most scientists agree on the issue.)

Nearly two-thirds of those polled now believe the impacts will be negative, and nearly seven in 10 favor more government involvement in and attention to the issue. Those saying they know a lot about global warming now stand at 63 percent, up from 42 percent 10 years ago. Krosnick told the editors that 31 percent of those polled in 2007 identify global warming as the single biggest environmental problem facing the world, up from 16 percent in 2006.

Again, however, there's the partisan gap, and the gap between registered Democrats and Republicans has been getting larger.

Krosnick pointed to what he called a "takeaway" message for the editors: more than half think there is extensive disagreement among scientists on climate change, with about 40 percent saying most scientists are in agreement. That 40 percent represents just a modest increase from the 35 percent of respondents answering that way 10 years ago.

Why? Krosnick said indications are that the news media's pursuit of journalistic "balance" in their news stories is a major factor, but he said tests of that hypothesis are still in the works.

Seattle Times Executive Editor David Boardman, for one, questioned that hypothesis, suggesting instead that talk radio is responsible for the fog of misunderstanding about scientific opinion on the climate change issue.

Krosnick told the editors that the movement among many news organizations against always including a "skeptical" voice for the sake of balance has not necessarily led to a concomitant change in public opinion. "Americans don't have short memories," he told the editors. "They remember what we used to tell them."

Krosnick's polling research also addressed other aspects of opinion on climate change, he said. He said his polls found Americans highly supportive of regulations requiring more diverse sources of electricity; more fuel-efficient cars and appliances; more energy-efficient buildings; and reduced power plant emissions.

But when it comes to paying for those improvements, he said his study makes clear that public support declines as costs increase.

Krosnick concluded by telling the editors that his research shows a public policy is seen by the American public as "nationally serious" when the public reaches a collective conclusion that:

• the problem exists;
• it's bad for people;
• they are certain of the problem;
• they feel humans are responsible for causing it; and
• they feel the problem can be fixed.

For now, he said, public support for the "consensus" scientific conclusion about warming and anthropogenic impacts is "huge," and he said public acceptance will continue to grow so long as scientific evidence continues pointing in that direction.

Back to Feature Article